the year. our guest will be texas republican representative farenthold and representative bernie sanders from vermont. and we will look at president obama's decision to resume military trials for vat knees in guantanamo bay, cuba. "washington journal" is next. >> if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. >> the senate stands adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] host: the senate failing to vote on two spending bills. that vote on two competing plans that would trim the federal budget for the remainder of this fiscal year, which expires the end of september. the republican plan would cut up

to $61 billion from the federal budget. the democratic plan would reduce spending by an estimated $6.5 billion. because neither would require 60 votes in the senate -- house republicans are working on another short-term extension. they're continuing resolution expires next friday. we will focus on spending, the debt, and deficit. it discussion and debate over the current fiscal year and looking ahead to the budget debate for the next fiscal year. our e-mail address and twitter page -- this story from inside "the washington post."

senate continues to rankle for a budget solution. -- wrangle for a budget solution. humberto sanchez is covering this for "the national journal." thank you for being with us. set the stage. what will happen when the debates and votes and under way and noon eastern time on the senate floor. live coverage on c-span2. guest: looks like senate democrats are looking to lay down markers that show the house-pass the bill and their own democratic alternative, and

neither will be able to win the 60 votes needed. and that a middle path will have to be forged in order to get through this impasse. host: $61 billion from the republican plan, $6.5 billion for the democratic plan. how the the two sides meet? guest: that is the thing. this vote also, senate democrats believe, will help push republicans off of their figure and hopefully will get them and negotiating. senate democrats are also calling for a kind of a broader discussion on the issue. these two bills on a look at current discretionary spending. democrats are hoping -- if republicans won cuts for the rest of the fiscal year, they should bring other things to the

table like taxes and other entitlements provisions that they believe could also save money and cut the deficit. host: "roll call" indicating house republicans already continued work on another extension. of the 1st deadline was march 4. the next deadline is friday, march 18. what is happening on the house side? guest: the house is looking to pass another short-term extension. casting doubt an agreement is reached before that march 18 deadline. house majority whip says they will continue to chip away. you said they believe they can pass another two, three, four- week extension that would cut roughly $2 billion a week to meet the $61 billion goal.

in response, senator harry reid said he is opposed to another short-term extension, and he thinks miller there is no long term because there is only six- months left to the fiscal year. a host: another headline is from "politico." a reference to senator joe manchin, former west virginia governor and now senator from the state. he is a democrat. >> the more important question is -- it is this? why are we engaging in this political theater. why are we voting on partisan proposals that we know will fail, that we know don't balance the nation's priorities with the need to get our fiscal house in order? why are we doing all of this when the most powerful person in these negotiations, or present, has failed to lead this debate or offer a serious proposal for spending and cuts that he would be willing to fight for?

host: the president was in boston yesterday talk about education, essentially saying he is open to budget cuts but doesn't want to see sydney didn't cuts and education, calling that a failed economic policy. where will the lines be drawn? guest: again, these two bills are not expected to fail. the democrats believe that these will set the parameters of the debate. so, you need to show that these things cannot pass in the senate. that they will have to kind of go back to the drawing board, but within these outlines, within these two bills, and find something that will pass both the house, where you have a 87- new tea party-back democrats calling for this high deficit cut number, and will pass and the democratically-controlled senate where they are trying to limit the number of cuts. they are trying to preserve some of those democratic priorities

that were funded over the last two years. host: you point out in your story that senator chuck schumer will deliver a speech on this issue. what is his message? guest: yesterday senator durbin and senator schumer today will call on broadening the playing field, broadening the discussion. when it comes to deficit reduction, mandatory spending cuts and tax code reform should be part of the final compromise. host: and the republican message? guest: the republican message is essentially yesterday senate republicans were kind of singing from the same sheet as house republicans on the overall level of cuts. senator lamar alexander yesterday said that a vote for the republican proposal is a support for the $61 billion in cuts. but they also reserve the right

to cut defunded their own priorities within that $61 billion figure. and so, while they are supporting the overall cut, they are signaling they may have different priorities within that figure. host: walk us through the scenarios with the two votes scheduled today, mid afternoon on the senate floor. the house working on extending the continuing resolution. are we likely to see another extension, more debate and discussion, and as you point out, some "renegotiations" that will keep the government running through september? guest: i think everyone believes there is going to be an extension of some kind on this. and as negotiations continue, you know, the upshot is that everybody wants to avoid a government shutdown and try to find some kind of compromise. the problem right now is people

are very wedded to their positions and it is not clear exactly what that compromise looks like at the moment. host: humberto sanchez from "national journal" and his story can be read online at nationaljournal.com. on to your phone calls this wednesday morning as the senate prepares to vote on these two competing spending packages -- the democratic proposal, $6.5 billion in cuts and republican proposal, $61 billion in cuts. what should happen next? betty on the republican line from potter springs, georgia. go ahead with your comment. concerned about the cut. i was in the balance of the budget -- part of the working community when president reagan was in, and that that particular

time, the budget was balanced -- we have to give up 10 years of our social security. i am wondering if this balance will hit me again. i am 77 years old. and i going to have to give of my social security to -- for this budget to become balance? host: frontpage of "the hill" newspapers, but code-chairs of the debt commission. -- the co-chairs of the debt commission. alice is joining us from michigan. caller: i am 77 also. i and concerned about my social security and my children and grandchildren. i think the government should stay open for the departments that are necessary and everyone else can go home and forfeit their pay.

i think the only reason they are -- i did not know if they are going to get it -- is so they can keep agreeing to disagree. host: eric from cedar town, georgia. what is your take question of caller: thank you for c-span. my take on this is this. if you talking points going on with the republican party. rationing health care. but the organ transplants -- transplants. and this is what will happen with the medicaid cuts. they will start to ration health care. social security is money people paid in. it is not welfare. it is their money. it is not broke. it has nothing to do with the budget. also, we could pay off china -- this would kill the interest. we could raise taxes and cut out subsidies to the oil cos.

-- oil companies. the unemployment rate for african-americans is 16% and the national rate is 8.9%. the unemployment rate among white americans who has got to be low. it is not high. black people in congress and congressmen need to get out of mobilize and get these people so black people can't get jobs such as myself. we want to work. this is what i am trying to get to. the tea party and these people are doing nothing. they have jobs. the unemployment rate is 16% for african-americans. host: thank you for calling. a story in "the washington times. " the president in boston yesterday. the headline -- the president sees nothing responsible in cutting federal education funds. marty from california. good morning. caller: i just wanted to say that the united states is not

broke. no county, no city, no state is broke. they have hidden accounts called a comprehensive and annual financial report. of these accounts are for local governments. it is an undisclosed taxpayer finance -- the value goes up as the public debt and the budget deficits rise. people don't know about these. and people need to get in and look under their state, county, schools. these are hidden accounts of that hold billions and billions and billions of dollars that we don't even know about. we are not broke. they do this to raise the taxes and eliminate services for the people. people get up now. go look under your state and county and schools. look under the comprehensive annual financial report and see the allies being told today. host: front page of "the new york times" has more on the situation in libya.

reports that gaddafi is flattening some cities and reports that he "bombs the hell " out of the cities. and rising gas costs find nations better prepared. the story is on the front page of "the new york times." biloxi, mississippi. republican line. voting today on two senate

bills. live coverage on c-span2. getting under way at noon eastern and 9:00 on the west coast. john, good morning. caller: good morning, steve. how're you doing this morning? host: how you? caller: pretty good. if the federal reserve, if they would freeze the interest they are charging the united states government to borrow money from the federal reserve -- which is a private organization moaning us money -- if they would freeze the interest on this for a good year, instead of cutting everything they are talking about cutting, they would solve this deficit problem. but the problem with all of this cutting they are trying to do, as long as they are charging as interest on every dollar they print, it is not going to help us any. one of your callers, the black fellow, he is still playing the

race card. this is an all american problem. not just black people. everybody is out of work. gas prices are high. anyway, that is all i had to say, steve. host: thank you for your call. from our twitter page -- erskine bowles, the co-share of the presence -- presidents that commission, was former chief of staff for president clinton had a joint alan simpson, former republican senator, testifying before the budget committee and he reiterated a message has been talking about, that the cuts did not go deep enough and did not attack the real problem. here's more from yesterday's testimony before the senate budget committee. >> $61 billion out of a $3.70 trillion budget is 1.6%. i can cut my budget $1.60 --

1.6% by tonight, tomorrow morning. i took $625 million out of a $3 billion budget at the university of north carolina. 1.6% is nothing. the problem is, that you all are focusing on taking 1.6% out of a very narrow part of the budget come out of 12 percent of the budget, so some of the cuts are having a disproportionate adverse affect on certain groups of people. host: erskine bowles testifying yesterday on capitol hill. politico has this had line. senate showdown on budget cuts. david rogers winning of republicans will bring the -- bring their cuts to the senate floor. among rank-and-file grumbling among the gop and no sign of capturing the credit defections needed to command a simple majority, let alone 60 votes for passage.

let me reiterate, this is just the debate to keep the government running through the end of september. the debate is already under way for the president's government will go that he put forth last month. that debate will continue through this spring and summer and more than likely into the fall. mary joining us from chicago. democrats' line. caller: if they were really serious about cutting the deficit, first, they would look at collecting the receipts already old by the federal government -- already owed. in the city of chicago, for those who are opposed, real reform -- i would suggest they look at state and local fees. look any have to further than what the city of chicago did what their parking

meters. -- with their parking meters. anytime you patronize an establishment like a grocery store or utility store, you have to now pay parking fees to even go into your own neighborhood. not looking at the entire picture. you reduce federal receipts and you will see your state and local taxes go through the roof. danny for -- host: danny from new iberia. caller: i was watching congressional testimony yesterday, and one thing that struck me is erskine bowles said that if we didn't want to do all of these cuts and cut social security and everything, basically we would have to raise the top marginal rate to 70% and be out of the problem.

erskine bowles said that. right before obama reagan came in and started this experiment giving the rich tax breaks and trickling down and this is the end result. we get to the end result and they want to oppress us further by attacking the social to adjourn the an education system. why not put it back into the 70 percent into the conversation? ghost: under the plan, social security retirement age would increase to 69 but that would not take into effect until 2075. caller: that is a slippery slope. once they start cutting social security -- and that would affect my children more than myself. host: if you look at medicare, medicaid, and social security, that is 60% of the budget and part of the discussion here is discretionary spending is not going far enough or deep enough to make a real impact on what is

approaching a $15 trillion debt. caller: admittedly we have a problem. and when the family has a problem we cannot take little susie school books or grannies oatmeal away from her. what we do is go back and get another job and get more revenue. this problem has evolved over three decades of supply-side economics where the rich and corporations pay no taxes. erskine bowles said himself that the wealthy went back to 70% top marginal rate, the problem is over. he was not saying that to solve the problem but saying it as criticism. it is the truth and where we need to talk about. host: thank you for the call. bob has this comment -- one area that has been a target of discussion has been the subject of a front-page story in "the washington times." cuts to npr.

they get $60 million to $90 million a year. they found themselves swept up in a perfect storm of criticism after an undercover tape captured a top executive of saying tea party reporters were seriously racist --

that video is available on the dailycaller web site. it comes as conservatives examine the funding of npr. and a follow-up story from the front page of "the washington times." he points out that npr hates committee a look -- hates in

middle america. plain and simple. are you listening and c-span radio? caller: yes, i do. host: keep an eye on the road. caller: is it true that we have pretty much worked out the 2012 but -- budget, well on our way? host: i would say we are far away from that. caller: what i think is going on with the 2011 is an exercise by the politicians, both democratic and republican, tea party, whatever, to make it look like they are actually busy by opposing things that are unreasonable on both sides. it is useful because it brings up the topic of everything as a possible item that can be cut. i think the 2011 exercise is

going to be an exercise. and the two extensions -- federal workers in constant fear of their jobs and livelihood. i think the 2011 exercise will be a continuing resolution for the rest of the year. then it will get to work for 2012. host: thank you for calling and thank you for listening on c- span radio. you can find us at 90.1 fm but you can listen nationwide on xm channel 132 and streamed on the web at c-spanradio.org. an e-mail -- also, one of our twitter followers have this comment.

another e-mail -- dan is joining us from annapolis, maryland. a republican line. caller: i just thought i would make a couple of comments to add to the talk here. i have been listening to your programming for a few days, and i find it really, really troubling the direction your programming and the people calling in. it reminds me of people trying to go to the government trough for bits and pieces of change. that is very troubling. i think there are a lot of

smart, smart people in the u.s. who could solve the financial problems. i think it is a travesty that none have been elected in congress. as a result, the people you put in congress spent $14 trillion we do not have as a nation. as a result, every single tax dollar that your audience sense of the u.s. government, 40% of that, 40 cents out of every tax dollar, is going to pay for interest. i think your programming of to be targeted on helping people understand -- got to be targeted on helping people understand what a difficult problem the nation is in because of the debt. and they need to take bold action. groveling over 6 billion, $10 billion is just a ridiculous conversation at this point in time. i think we need to tackle the big issues and i think you as the media need to help people understand and discuss it. that is my comment. host: thank you for the call.

the 5% benchmark one of the earlier view was put on the table. from our twitter page, another of you were saying -- viewer saying -- gary locke, expected to be new ambassador to china, currently the commerce secretary, "the financial times" has this headline -- there is a larger piece in the front page of "the washington post" looking at relations between the president and members of his own cabinet.

that in 1979 you may remember jimmy carter firing many of his cabinet secretaries.

you can read more on the front page of "the washington post." and the story is also available online. bob is joining us from minnesota. independent line. the senate voting today on two spending bills. what is your take? caller: i think the spending bills -- there's 32 states that get more money back from the federal government then they put in. just add something that no state can get back more than 85%. let the local states cut the government spending in their states where it is excessive. right now, when we export something to our biggest trading partners, there is a value-added tax, and china is 25%, canada, 15%, mexico, 20%. we should have a reciprocal about the added tax on all imports from those countries.

but the money toward social security and medicare because it is both imports taking the jobs away from this country. we need some real honesty. we talk about the death tax but in reality the percentage of people who die in the united states to pay the death tax is very small. if we call it a hording tax, people would be understanding what it was a little bit more. you had a gentleman on last week that was talking about words that are used. and we need to have some honest, open discussion. we talk about the mandate that the republicans received. but in reality, if at and the total number of people who didn't vote -- if you add in of the total number of people who didn't vote and those who attic -- against those elected, very few candidates and they decide will receive more than 35% of the total number the did vote.

bear is no mandate. this country is just kind of drifting and until we get people engaged in the country and taking part and listening to people -- things that are more than 30-second sound bites. there is why i think npr national public television and c-span a good source of because you get more than a 30-second sound bite. host: as you may know this past week and we commemorated the 150th anniversary of the inaugural address and he received only 39 percent of the vote back and 1860's. caller: he knew he didn't bat -- he didn't have a mandate. he knew he had to be interested in what the people in the whole country was thinking in order to govern. he got people from both sides, even his opponents, to take part in the government and he involved in them. right now we say it is my way or the highway. and that doesn't work.

we are a country bent on compromise. if you look back in history and read how the competition was put together, it was nothing but compromise. host: i will stop you there. thank you for the call. e-mails are coming in -- and this take it -- this morning, continuing to wrangle with a budget solutions. that is from "the washington post."

a speech that lasted well over seven hours with senator bernie sanders, independent from vermont. he will talk about his right -- recommendations on the u.s. debt and deficit and whether priorities should be. here's a preview of what bernie sanders had to say on the senate floor last december 10. >> their greed and recklessness and illegal behavior destroyed this economy. and what they did to the american people is so horrible, so horrible. here you are, middle-class, which is already battered -- which we discussed this -- a result of trade agreements, loss of manufacturing jobs, health care costs, can't afford to send your kids to college. then these guys start pushing worthless and complicated financial instruments. a whole thing explodes. the whole thing explode and they come crying to the taxpayers of america to bail them out. and i will never forget, never

hank paulson coming -- before it was the democratic caucus, and i am an independent -- coming before the democratic caucus and saying within a few days he needed $700 billion or the entire world's financial system could collapse. host: the speech by senator bernie sanders on c-span to -- c-span2, it received a record number of twitter messages and part of the c-span video library, as now been turned into a book called "the speech." "the hill" front-page story -- laurie is joining us from the u.s. virgin islands. welcome to the conversation.

caller: good morning. bernie sanders is my hero, and i am so thrilled he is going to be on. he is probably the last decent, honest man standing in the senate. apropos of this thing with npr. i really think. i don't remember the gentleman's name was called on the videotape of but i completely agree with him. if you look at the demographic of the tea party, it is kind of stunning. and as a little, old white lady myself, i can tell you that i really do think they are racist. they might not understand that they are racist. they might not even think they are racist but, in fact, they are.

i think they are of a generation, which is mine, who will be -- they will be gone. and america will be a different looking place. host: laurie, thanks for the call from st. croix, virgin islands. this headline, comments from house minority leader steny hoyer, a democrat from maryland, saying it may take as many as 20 years to balance the federal budget. richard is joining us from hazard, kentucky. good morning greta the senate voting today. you can watch the coverage beginning at noon eastern on c- span2. good morning. caller: the better be getting

our jobs back from foreign countries or charging a tariff on the surplus. nobody makes -- we need fair trade. we do not need protective trade, fair trade. if they import 20 million, ship 20 million or otherwise they have a tariff on the difference. a bunch of people out of jobs. host: on the republican line, a viewer -- cleveland, ohio. the democrats' line. good morning, maxine. caller: good morning to laurie. i certainly agree with her 100 percent. host: i am certainly sure it is

warmer where she is then in ohio. caller: what i wanted to remind everybody is this massive propaganda machine we have going in this country that's got the people confused. you always hear, well, you are not serious about cutting the deficit unless you an attack -- attack entitlements. i did not think it is serious if you did not attack a corporate welfare. i did not believe that they take our hard earned tax dollars -- do not believe that they take our hard earned tax dollars and spend it to send our jobs somewhere else. it is almost insane. and the tea party people, they have been hoodwinked. they were saying stopping the spending. they did not know it meant stop feeding poor children, impoverished children, take away health care and food for old people. that's not what they meant. and i did not think they are serious until they tackle all of

the subsidies they give to oil and gas. and i am not listening to any of them until they start talking about that. and in cleveland, we don't have any corporate taxes. we had zero corporate taxes for years. and it looks like war-torn beirut. we've got -- everything is closed up. all of the neighborhood businesses. homes. it is devastating in cleveland. i heard our new governor yesterday talking about jobs, jobs, jobs. he refused a $1.2 billion grant the government was going to give us to start that speed rail thing. that was going to create 17,000 jobs. he is not interested in jobs. host: maxine, thank you for your call. from our twitter page --

from tracy and sugar land, texas -- we have many loyal viewers. but no one is more loyal than joe in georgia. how many years have you been listening and watching c-span? caller: ever since you started and you did a super job and it is an honor to talk to you and it on c-span. i have a novel idea. putting together a group of 27 million small businesses in america. the millions of tea party people. and small talents -- people from those towns, to put pressure on congress to really cut spending. the key is, the $60 billion is

not enough. we need a couple hundred billion and we will get behind mitt romney as our presidential candidate, and get behind him to do everything we can to let him president. it think about this -- you get the 27 million small businesses together, tea party people, millions of them, and small towns, you get them getting after congress to cut spending and it can be a huge thing. host: if they don't do it? what is your solution? caller: winston churchill said never give up. you have to keep fighting. i think this coalition -- i and totally -- i am totally dedicated and fired up and energized. host: thank you. we will talk to you in 30 days. you referred to colonel poole -- what is his military record? caller: can you hear me? honorary colonel made by colonel sanders -- i am a colonel, too,

and both of us are members of the tea party. it is just honorary, i guess by the kentucky gov.. but he is not a military colonel but he is a great american. host: joe, so are you. thank you for the call. caller: i love c-span. host: joe calls every 30 days and we appreciate the fact that he abides by the role that you hold on to make sure others can weigh in with their comments. you can join the conversation on line on our twitter page. one of our viewers -- credit joining us from atlanta. the senate debating today spending bills. neither of which expected to pass. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span.

what i wanted to say was about the republicans. they have built up north that would not allow college students to vote when they turn 18. i wonder if the american people know that. down here in georgia, republican has a bill that if a woman has a miscarriage she has to prove it was not done on purpose and she can't, she goes to jail. i'm wondering if american people know that. people need to wake up. republicans hussein we are broke, then why do they keep giving billions of tax cuts to the wealthy? we have to take it from the backs of the hardworking american people. i just think we need to wake up. a and as republicans take over everything and get back into the white house, we will have serious problems. host: thank you for the call. susan from freeport, maine. welcome to the conversation. caller: first-time caller.

one, no discussion of raising the retirement age of social security will only exacerbate unemployment. more people staying in the workforce. two -- since bernie sanders is coming on, please ask kim -- and ask him, at the response from erskine bowles and since then why people can't pay unemployment social security now matter what they make. 3, if you want the military budget, they can find you $60 billion right away. some interested representatives and senators are forcing them to take for their own constituents. finally, most people think social security and medicare go to people. in my case, i have been -- i

have income replacement. i am on disability. under retirement age. i want to get that disability and take care of myself. i was forced by my insurance company to apply for ssi so they can get some of their money back from the social security trust fund. host: thank you for the call. representative farenthold will join us in a few minutes. texas republican. one viewer has a this from the twitter page -- jason is joining us from las vegas. caller: good morning, how are you? it is really troubling because i am looking at the tea party and the republican party. it ever since i was a child i watched ronald reagan, and bush 41 and 43.

they cared about the country but if you look at the state of america, but trade. when you look at the tea party, the so-called grassroots that has nothing to do with america getting better but getting worse. i just ask every american listening right now, if they so called a tea party, let's create a coffee possee and let's tell every republican and every lawmaker that teachers, firemen, our army servicemen and people that actually do something to help americans day- by-day should be getting paid more than any senator and any president. because the teacher teaches them, a senator and a president, but a president does not teach a teacher nothing and all of the senators and presidents -- give me back your pension. give me back your social security.

how coal is that? when a teacher actually taught the president? host: dealing with the situation in libya. from "the financial times." muammar gaddafi "bombing the hell" out of a city. you see some of the rebel protesters outside the capital of tripoli. the two editorials -- first, "the new york times." pointing out the obama administration is throwing out some many conflicting messages on libya that they are blunting any pressure on the libyan regime and weakening american credibility. of that from "the new york times." in his syndicated column, george will -- "stay out of libya."

george will this morning in his syndicated column, some of the views expressed on the developing story in libya. senator bernie sanders will join us later in the program to talk about the debt and deficit and federal spending. also a meeting with members of the smithsonian asking for more american-made products to be sold at the museums here in washington. later, we will introduce you to c-span that a grand prize studentcam winner as "washington journal" continues this wednesday morning. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> this weekend, book tv is live the what two days of panel discussions and interviews. from the tucson festival of books, including a former governor roll castro, gloria phelps, and a public surprise winner. panels on immigration, women in leadership and a look back at the 60's. also been on c-span2's "book tv" on "afterwards" a talk about the canyon genealogy of barack obama with president of king's college. go to booktv.org. >> with congressional chronicle you can follow every word from the house and senate floor on line, track daily time lines, read transcripts and find a full video archive. a joint meeting of congress

with cost-cutting prime minister julia gillard. see what others have said during their joint meetings c-span.org /congress. >> there is a new way to get a concise review of the day's events. it is "washington today" on c- span ready. every week day we will take you to capitol hill, the white house, and everywhere news is happening and we will talk to experts, politicians, and journalists as we put a dent into perspective. the stories that matter to you the most, at every weekday, 5:00 to 7:00 eastern time on c-span ready. listen in what -- washington- baltimore area at 90.1 fm, xm satellite 132 or go online ad c- span.org. also available as an iphone app or downloaded every evening as a c-span podcast. >> "washington journal" continues.

host: we welcome republican congressman blake farenthold, a republican but texas. freshman. guest: my pleasure. getting up earlier -- early and talking to folks. host: you did talk radio for how many years? guest: 10 years. i was the co-host of a morning show. host: what has it been like for you this congressional term? guest: it is going fast and furious. one of the things i noticed is that congress is much more reactionary than contemplated. i thought there would be a lot more thinking and long-range planning. we really react much more to what the daily headline is. i am a little uncomfortable with that. i like to take the longer view of things. so, one of the things i am working on it is really trying to understand what is going on and coming up with a plan and working the plan, rather than just reacting. host: one of 87 new members of this congress. let me ask you what is on the senate agenda. they were supposed to vote

yesterday. failure to get it to the floor. but two different packages. the house plan that would cut $61 billion from spending. senate democratic plan that would cut 5-$6 billion. neither expected to pass. what is happening in the house? guest: obviously we are waiting to see what the senate has done. if you look at the senate democrat plan, it has been restored more are around $4 billion range and that is more like what the government spends in one day. even if you take a higher number, it is what the government spends in two days. i did not think those are the meaningful cuts the american people wanted when they turn it house of american -- house of representatives around. host: some say if republican budget cuts are implemented we could lose anywhere from 700,000 up to 1 million jobs. guest: economists are a lot like lawyers. in the old joke is if you ask an engineer what one plus one is he says two, you ask an accountant,

they say two, yes a lawyer or an economist, they say, what you wanted to be? you got experts on both sides that go either way. what i feel is at the level we are spending, it is completely unsustainable. but we also have to shift the conversation away from just cutting spending. we have to grow income to the government. people may be throwing of the hands saying, ahh, that means more taxes. what it means is getting people back to work because that is what grows the economy and increases income to the government. every person you put back to work, it takes somebody off the welfare rolls, turns them into a taxpayer, gives them a good income so they can go out and buy things. it is like hitting a triple and baseball when you get somebody back to work. an addition to cutting spending, you need to cut a burdensome regulations keeping people out of work. host: and p r back in the news,

in part because there is some undercover video that had an and the architect of going after the tea party. -- had a npr representative going after the tea party. guest: pbs stations in most markets are some of best equipped and best funded. i have a friend i worked with in high school that works at a pbs station -- they have four branded transmitters in two separate sites. most commercial radio stations are lucky to have the current transmitted in one site and one from the 1950's that is the back of thing something goes wrong. there is a lot in npr. i really do think with government funding gone, it opens them up to the ability to raise more from the private sector. i voted on the amendment to defund npr, but i also wrote a

check for $500 to my local npr station. if it is public broadcasting, it should be voluntary supported by the public and not mandatory by the taxpayers. host: deductions for home mortgages. guest: home mortgages is important than the u.s. and i would hate to see that the way. i actually think home on a ship is a good thing. i do think we have gone too far on that on programs that require banks to loan money to people who could not repay them. but i do think making homes more affordable through interest deduction is reasonable. of course, if you go to where most -- a good chunk of -- i would say most of the freshmen, including myself, will want to go, to either a flat tax or fair tax, it becomes moot. there would not be the level of deductions we have now. our current tax system is so complicated because we are trying to implement social policy through the tax system.

host: should the retirement age for social security increase, and if so, what age and when? guest: it will have to be increased. the math does not work on social security. if you take a step back and look of the history of the social security program, it was enacted at a time when typically people only lived two or three years after they went on social security. our medical advances of one so far. you are living a whole lot longer being on social security. plus, it was enacted at a time when the population was growing. there will always more young people than there were old people paying into the system. now people are living longer and the population is aging. we are going to have to address social security. but we are going to have to address it in a responsible manner that does not leave it -- the people retired now are about to retire, we cannot read the rug out from under them. but i am telling my kids -- and even me, i am 50. i am not expecting to see full

social security benefits. i am planning for my own retirement and savings. and again got my back to the history -- social security was intended to supplement and not be the sole form of income for retirees. host: this is a headline from "christian news service" -- steny hoyer saying the budget may not be ballots for 20 years. guest: we have been running deficits for a long time. the trick is, we got to turn the trend line around. we are borrowing a lot of money, about half of which from the chinese, and going up and up with no turnaround. eventually, even the chinese will figure out they are baring more than they can pay back and it will get more and more difficult, more and more expensive for us to borrow money. i don't think we will be able to balance the budget in two years but we have to get the trend lines shirt -- turned sharply around. host: we will take your phone calls and send us an e-mail or

send us a twee. sue is joining us from old orchard beach, maine. you are on with representative farenthold, republican from texas. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. just a small point of history. the discussion about the need to raise the age for social security retirement. i happened to be watching the news when johnson, lyndon baines johnson, was president, and he made the announcement that the social security funds coming in would be folded into the general fund. and every dollar that has come in since then has been spent on something else. that was 40 years ago. so, everybody who has been in the house or senate and has anything to do with any of vote that left the money that way and

let it all go, is now responsible -- as a matter of fact, i feel those retirees for fiduciary irresponsibility and it just makes my skin crawl. thank guest: regardless of it even if we have not touched it, the demographics have turned around so much, we were eventually on a collision course with itself. i am a big fan of social security. we have to be realistic in what we can do with all retirement funds. be it social security or pensions. we have to take a look at the economic reality of the time. facts are facts. the math doesn't work. host: good morning, bob. caller: i am glad you are somebody who wants to take a

long view of these things. let's take a long tube backwards. we have the lowest effective tax rate since 1950 right now. if you look at what happened, we had a 50% gain in productivity over the last 50 years. all of which has gone to the top 2%. if you look at a chart, the only group that is shown any appreciable increase in income -- why is it so wrong to tax them? if we had just distributed all those increases in productivity in a rational manner, we would have a 30-hour workweek and a full employment. > guest: you have to look a lot of the numbers. a lot of people run their business through llc's.

a lot of those numbers are misleading because those are the business numbers that are running through. as you increase the tax rate on the wealthy, they end up looking for tax shelters. believe me, they have plenty of money to pay for the lawyers. i think we need to be focused on is not so much the tax rate as far as increase in revenue, but getting people back to work and growing the economy. the way to do that is to get government out of your way. i was talking to a federal official down in my district office in charge of the permitting process. how long does it take if i wanted to build something -- how long does it take for me to go through the permitting process which or agency? he looked me in the eye and said it would probably take between three years and seven years. i looked up at him and said when

you go home tonight and are trying to get to sleep, i want you to remember every day that permit sits on your desk, somebody is not going back to work. the excessive delays that you are enforcing and you are not giving 110% on trying to push through is keeping people unemployed. no bureaucrat has ever got fired for saying no. that is bad. we have to start firing bureaucrats so we can get stuff done blake farenthold represents brown still and texas. a freshman republican, one of our viewers saying it --

guest: absolutely. we have to cut spending. that is not the only piece. simultaneousave debate going on about cutting spending and the government regulation. it is not just doing more with less. that is an important part of it. it is about creating more, letting the private sector do with the need to. what the government has to do as far as permitting any project that they do, it runs the cost way, way up and increases the delay. we saw with the obama stimulus package the inability to find jobs that of gone through the permitting process and were ready to do. it takes two, three, five, seven years to get anything from the idea stage, the architectural drawing the stage, to actual completion.

that is way too many hoops to jump through. >host: with the tax cuts and two wars, chris has this point -- guest: president bush, someone i supported, he had a bad spending habit. he did a whole lot of good, but he was a spender. there is no question that he is a part of the problem. under the obama administration, spending has gone way up, more so than the bush administration. the bulk of it needs to be placed on the former house, the former senate, and the white house. host: one issue that would generate more revenue would be to change the tax rate for those americans making in excess of

$250,000 per year. would you support that? guest: no. like a said earlier, the two to $50,000 income level includes businesses that are -- the $250,000 income level includes businesses that are llc's. it may become more appealing. raising the tax rate, historically, has not proved to generate income. even john f. kennedy in his speeches in the '60s were saying the way to grow and stimulate the economy is to lower the tax rate, stimulate the economy, and see the economy grow. it does not go up by raising the tax rates on individuals who have worked hard -- why are we looking at punishing people who have been successful? host: what about the argument

that taxes did you up and president clinton had a surplus for president bush? guest: we were riding a wave of lower government regulation from previous administrations. clinton was in the right place at the right time. clinton was willing to work with and compromise with the congress. we are not seeing that from the white house right now. where is the vice-president in leading the debate in the senate? he is m.i.a. we need some leadership and the white house. it is not just in the economy. if you look at oil prices, it costs $90 here in washington to fill up my car. almost $3.50 in some areas throughout the country. where is the leadership on this? gas prices are through the roof. yet we have a defect moratorium

on drilling in the gulf of mexico, an attack on the oil and gas companies, we have big parts of the united states off-limits for oil. you have the white house that was either caught flatfooted or choose to ignore what happened in egypt with more khaddafi and we have no leadership. it has oral companies all concerned and the prices running through the roof. we need some leadership on the budget. we are simply not seeing it. host: $200,000 for individuals, $250,000 for couples. please do not spread misinformation. independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. name me one job bill that you

have introduced since you have been in congress. you keep saying cut the deficit to create jobs. tell america one job bill you or your party has introduced since you have been in congress. thank you very much. guest: you take one of the first things that we did, repealed the obamacare bill. that was stifling businesses throughout the country. we cannot afford to grow or me these insurance mandates. we cannot afford to do the reporting requirements associated. we are committed to creating jobs through getting the government out of the way of the private sector to create those jobs. host: let me go back to the bipartisan fiscal commission and put on the table one recommendation in regard to

social security. a means test benefits formula, raising the retirement age to 69, refining what they call the cost of living measure which would reduce what you would get in your social security check, raising the ceiling of taxable income to 90% of earnings, and include minimum benefits for those who qualify. one of the other points in the testimony is that there are many people using social security as a supplement to the other pensions or investments. guest: i think there needs to be a meaningful debate on the ways to reform social security. every one of those ideas is on the table. we have to come up with what the best ones of those are. some of them are good ideas. some of them are ok. some of them are bad ideas.

we need to not be afraid to sit down during committee hearings to listen to the experts and the people of social security and decide what we are going to do over the long term. we need to figure out how we are going to say that this system so it is a safety net for those who want to retire. we need to do the right thing and not worry about the 2012 elections. host: responding to this e-mail -- guest: i am going to take issue with several of the points. and the wars in the middle east are not over oil. they are over freedom and

protecting this country from terrorists. not a lot of oil is produced in afghanistan. it is based on a home security issue. there are plenty of safety nets in place right now the safety nets have turned into a safety amex. it is much too easy to sit at home, stay on the couch, and not go back to work you have got to get the point where your life is tough enough and you are willing to go but to work. when i was running the campaign, we had trouble finding employees to work for $9 or $10 an hour during the campaign. that is not the system we need. we need a system that encourages people to go back to work, and overtime, the level of payment has to increase enough to encourage you to go back to work. you do not change your life until you reach the level where

you need to change your life. host: we are talking to blake farenthold of texas. good morning, dan. caller: good morning, guys. the news media and congress all referred to social security as an entitlement. let me remind you that social security is not an entitlement. it is paid by the employer and the employee. another thing i would like to ask you, and then i will get off the line, holcomb congress cannot let go of the steering wheel on taxes -- how come congress cannot let go of the steering wheel on taxes? it works fine for canada. i have a lot of friends in canada and i have never heard a complaint from one of them over the system they have it. why don't you guys go up there

and take some lessons from those people and maybe we could get this all straightened out? thank you. guest: texas is a perfect example of a state that has a balanced budget. we have our budget problems in texas, but we have a constitution that requires a balanced budget. we are doing it with sales tax. i am all in favor of a national sales tax if it replaces the current income tax. host: , margaret is joining us from manchester, new jersey. welcome to the conversation. caller: i am curious person. are all you new gop people coached before you come to

washington and using the word democrat? guest: r was coached to use the word liberal. and i am violating the coaching now. the district ever present in texas is very historic leave strongly democrat. i was coached by my campaign people to say liberal and conservative, not democrat and republican. i am violating the coaching right now host: are you coached by the house leadership as well? guest: no, not really. we get various e-mails and stuff to read when we are flying home on the weekend, what they consider to be important. you pick the ones you like. you do not use the ones that you do not like. i am sometimes about a week ahead of what comes out from

them. i read the internet in the news. i am watching what is going on. i am used to being prepared to answer the questions. i think i and four or five days ahead of the e-mails that come .ut prett host: here is one from our twitter page. we should point out that you -- >guest: i think the biggest job creation bill is the repeal of the obamacare. that bill is really what i hear consistently from business folks -- if we are going to have to meet the insurance mandate, and we are going to have to meet these paperwork requirements, we are not going to grow, especially the small business

that does not have the legal department. they are scared. they hear bits and pieces on the news and they do not know how it is going to affect them. we did get the talking point memo from the gop leadership to refer it to the job killing or a job destroyer in health care bill. there really is what is it. that is an accurate talking point. it has businesses afraid to invest or grow over some of the threshold employment. we reputed in the house. " the same the were saying -- -- host: at the same to you were saying -- guest: we take a broad definition of year marks. we chose to do find it much broader and much more technically in the house. there are no earmarks. host: this is the were -- what

specific programs would you cut from the budget that would also cut spending? guest: the low-hanging fruit is in the report that came out this week. that is the easy stuff. there are over 80 different programs to provide transportation for the disabled. 82 programs deal with training teachers. there are over 25 informations systems that deal with public health, most of which do not talk to each other. there is so much duplication or one arm does not know what the other arm is doing. another perfect example is in our district. there are a lot of wind farms in texas. they are building it along the approach pattern of runways and airports. the wind farms interfere with the radar, so the department of energy and our tax credits are

funding wind farms in locations that are detrimental and will end up costing the navy and the municipalities and the faa money for coming up with solutions for this aviation. that is the real low hanging fruit. i really do think we need to shift more of the conversation away from the spending cuts, which got to be done, but we have not started talking about it enough yet, the cuts of regulation that will grow business. we are not working fast enough on that. host: you have been involved in this report. this was a report that was put together at the request of senator tom coburn of oklahoma. there are 100 separate surface transportation programs, 18 food and nutrition assistance programs, and 20 agencies

operating 56 different programs on financial literacy. guest: turn on the radio and listen to david ramsay. does the federal government need to be funding that? host: welcome to the conversation. good morning. caller: talking about bringing troops home and closing military bases, the only problem is if you bring them home, at least 5% of them are national guard. they are going to be looking for jobs so that gives us more on the unemployment line. the other thing is you keep saying we will raise the social security age. what'll we lower the age and -- why don't we lower the age and open up retirement for younger people? there are a lot of jobs taken by congressman that should of retired years and years ago.

we need to open the jobs up, not close them. guest: i don't think it is open up jobs as much is it is of creating new jobs. we have gotten turned around. we are talking about cuts and belt-tightening. yes, that is a part of it but the real message is the level of opportunity that still exists in this country that is stifled by regulation and the red tape that you have to go through. you know how hard it is to get your driver's license renewed. it takes half a day. imagine being a business having to go through 20 different permitting processes to build your factory or your plant. i had a computer consultant, and. the second person i hired was an

administrative person to keep track of all the paperwork for taxes, records, and fill out all of those forms. we have way too much red tape. it goes against you can do anything in america. you can do anything in america if you hire a team of lawyers and go through seven years of red tape. that is too long and too much. we are not working fast enough to cut the bureaucracy and regulation. that is going to be what kicks the income side up. host: one of our viewers saying -- this is what the site looks like. if you click on no. 2, it is a link to the report. senator tom coburn was with us last week on how to cut overlapping and programs that duplicate each other in the

federal government. that link will get you to the site that we are talking about. lee is joining us from mount pleasant, south carolina good morning. caller: think you for taking my call. the only group that is seen as an income increase is a group that will face higher taxes. the tax cut that we had in december for the top 2%, if we had not done that, that is $400 billion in savings. instead, we want to cut heating oil for the poor. can you think of somebody who would do something like that? i think our government has gotten to the point where people do not realize that cutting some of these programs, there is another way. we can raise taxes on the top 2% and it would not even know that it happened guest: i am

troubled by the whole mentality of the rich versus the poor. i would support a flat tax rate for everybody without all the deductions and complications or a national sales tax. this device of class warfare, the argument that i think it emanates from the other side of the aisle, it discourages success and it punishes success. that is not what america was built on. america was built on rewarding success. regardless of how high you raise the tax rates on whatever group, you have to get rid of the wasteful spending and the real growth in income is not from higher taxes. it is from increase productivity and economic growth. that is where we need to be focused. when not to -- would not need to be in this argument. host: paula says --

guest: it may not so much be cutting social security but changing the rules associated with the social security, where the retirement age comes up, and looking at -- you listed earlier the bipartisan report of things we can do. let's pick some of those things and do them. you cannot just ignore social security. there is not enough money coming in regardless of raiding the trust fund or not raiding the trust fund. there is not enough money coming in. the population is aging. people are staying alive longer. it is a great thing. maybe you need to work a little

bit longer, too. we have to look at their population demographics. the aging population is a problem. as the economy grows, and i am sure it is going to grow, we have to look at the younger folks in the work force. i think we are going to run out of people to fill some of the jobs. i am that optimistic about the economy. host: one of our viewers has this -- how do you respond to that sentiment? guest: again, i think we need to have a flat or fair tax, everyone pays a percentage of their income or the percentage of their spending to provide for the things that are essential and that we need. host: we are talking to rep

blake farenthold. sean is joining us on the independent blind. caller: think you for taking my call. as a fiscal conservative, i find it incredulous that americans want to look at raising taxes for the top 1%. it is just baffling that we can go and make these comments. i think everything should be on the table, looking at spending cuts, including defense, social security, and medicaid. a lot of people say foreign aid is only 1% of gdp. there are countries getting billions and billions of dollars a year. why are we not looking at cutting foreign aid? if we are cutting our own spending, we have to look at cutting foreign spending. guest: i do not think the defense is off the table.

what to think is off the table that is the stuff that directly affects the troops. the need to be well equipped with the tools necessary to keep their mission. just like any bureaucracy, the military is a long-term federal bureaucracy. there is a lot of stuff that has been there forever and it goes on through inertia. we need guys with the little green advisers to go in the books and look to see what is there. the house c.r. did away with the joint strike fighter. we went over the recommendations for cuts in the military. there is a fat everywhere. we have to cut it out and get the belts tightened. military is not off the table. foreign aid is a small chunk of the budget. it should be looked at.

israel is a really close ally in the area of the world that is not very friendly to the united states. i think we have to be real careful before we do anything with our foreign aid, to israel in particular, because they are in a tough region and our closest ally. a bulk of the aid that goes to israel comes back to the united states in the form of purchases from u.s. defense companies. it needs to be looked at. israel is a tough situation. if you look at the allies of the united states that are consistently with us, israel is right there. if you look at the other countries we are sending foreign aid to, 70% plus -- israel workaholic closer with us. just like everybody, we have to

look to see who we are sending over there is needed to be sent over there. there are some places that i would look. host: at this question -- guest: we cut our budget by 5%. it was one of the first things that we did it. that may not be all. host: what about pay cuts? guest: i do not have a problem with a pay cut. i did not come appeared to make the money. host: good morning, bobbie predicate caller: good morning. i wanted to chime in on some of the things that the representative said earlier about small businesses and the regulatory agencies that we are under almost on a daily basis.

it being a small business owner, and i am speaking from my heart on this, it feels to me that i am under attack by the federal government and some of the state and local governments that we do business with. it is literally getting ridiculous to try to grow your business. and deal with the regulations, the rules, the funding requirements, the fees. it has become a full-time position. that is the single biggest issue that i carry to bed with me at 9, worrying about where our country is headed. the class warfare has got to stop. our sales this year will be

around three-quarters of a million dollars per that right now, i am sitting with about $500 in my bank account with in to get paid. we are not rich. even though there is that kind of number, the small businesses are not rich in any way. guest: i think bobby is right on the money. you cannot run your business without the government having its hand in pretty much everything that you do. in texas, the epa is talking about regulating dust. imagine anybody who has been to a farmer knows that when you drive down a dirt road, you kick up the dust. we have to put the brakes on this excessive government regulation. everybody wants clean air and water, but let's find a way to keep it simple and get the regulations of the way. you cannot go one hour without

breaking some law or some regulation. maybe it is being, maybe it is tossing a gum wrapper out of a car. i do not think the average american can go one hour in their life without violating a law or a federal regulation. there is too much of it. host: another question -- let me go to this point and show our audience one extra from the hearing that we covered yesterday live on c-span. a former republican senator is the co-chair of the commission and he talked about medicare, medicaid, and other programs. >> i do not know where it is but at some point, when those people who hold our paper and thought

these guys had the guts to attack medicare, medicaid, the solvency of social security, do not swallow the business because we are balancing the budget on the backs of poor old social security people. it is wrong and untrue. host: your reaction? guest: looking at the budget includes looking at the entitlement programs like social security and medicare and medicaid. part of this is messaging. historically, we in washington and in the news media talk about discretionary versus non- discretionary spending. it is all discretionary. we should start calling it welfare or entitlements. we have to look at everything. nothing can be off the table. we do not want to lead people starving or hungry, but when we run up the money, that things

are going to happen. imagine what is going to happen -- right now we are spending 100% of discretionary spending. what happens when one day china says i cannot repay that money and quit loading it to us. just like when you get your credit line on your visa or mastercard and you go to charge something else, they say no. it is not beyond the realm of possibility that we will run up our credit line and i think that will be sooner rather than later. host: rep blake farenthold from texas. your first appearance on c-span. will you come back? guest: i love taking calls. you have a great view of the capital of. host: matt apuzzo will be

joining us later. what does guantanamo bay mean for the detainees? that is coming up later in the program. coming up next, bernie sanders will be joing us. we will also be introducing you to our student cam winner. >> an international intelligence official says that nato forces have seized the most powerful iranian-made rocket ever smuggled into afghanistan for the taliban's upcoming spring campaign. the rockets can be fired up to 30 miles. iran has been supplying arms to the taliban since 2006.

the united nations special investigator for torture is confirming that he has opened a probe into allegations of torture used by muammar gaddafi's forces. he tells reporters that the colonel's views of torture and illegal detention in the past is "very well documented." back here in washington, representative peter king speaking today on cbs says the hearing on the radical islam scheduled for tomorrow is necessary because the difference by al-qaeda to radicalize american muslims. he added that if another community was in the same position, the inquiry would zero in on the group as well.

c-span radio will air that hearing at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> you are watching c-span, bringing you politics and public affairs. every morning, is ." -- it is "washington journal." also, supreme court oral arguments. on the weekends, you concede our signature interview programs. -- you can see our signature interview programs. you can also watch our programming any time at c- span.org. it is all searchable at our c- span to deal library. -- our c-span video library.

host: we want to welcome back to c-span bernie sanders from vermont. a couple of the senate votes today. what is going to happen? guest: probably both of them will lose. we will have to do some serious business about how to move this country forward with a deficit reduction in the way that is fair to working families and the middle-class. the major concern that i have on the republican house bill that will be voted on it is it is too draconian in terms of the cuts that it is making. when so many working people are hurting, and the republican plan to throw over 200,000 kids off of programs, that is moving in the wrong direction. we work hard so low and middle income people get access to health care. i can tell you in my office and

offices all over the country, people are waiting to long. they have devastating cuts in social security administration, making it harder for people to get the benefits that they need it. it 30% cut in the environmental protection agency when we have to be vigorous about protecting the water and the air that we. . -- in the air that we brief. at a time when the richest people are doing much, much better. in my mind, it is morally unacceptable that he would balance the budget on the backs of the kids in our country while at the same time giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. host: you have heard from the republicans that argued that over the last two years we have seen an increase in government spending. let's bring it back to the 2007

levels -- >guest: when obama became president, we were on the cost of a worldwide depression. we were losing 700,000 jobs per month. it is unfair to republicans to say we spent a lot of money. sure we did it. we passed a stimulus package that put millions of people back to work, rebuilding our infrastructure, and doing a number of things that our country needed. my view is that when we have the most unequal distribution of income and wealth in the entire industrialized world with the top 1% now earning more income than the bottom 50%, the top 400 families in this country, not a lot of families, own more wealth

than the bottom 50% of families in america. that gap between the very, very rich and everybody else is widening. we need to move to -- we need to move our way to a deficit reduction that is not on the backs of the most vulnerable people of. host: you can send us an e-mail or join us on our twitter page. in case you missed it, yesterday, your colleague had this to say on the senate floor it pretr. >> why are we voting on partisan proposals that we know will fail? that we know that will not balance our priorities? what are we doing all this when

the most powerful person in these negotiations, our president, has failed to lead this debate or offer a series proposal for spending or cuts that he would be willing to fight for? guest: i would hope that the president does engage in this important discussion, but i will tell you that the reason i was on the floor in december for a 0.5 hours was a compromise agreement -- for 8.5 hours was because of the compromise agreement. what the president agreed to was extending the bush tax cuts for the top 2%, actually lowering the tax rates on the estate taxes would only apply to the top three tenths of 1%. we gave is again tax break to not only the wealthy, but the extremely wealthy, the extended tax breaks to the rich in terms of capital gains taxes.

i hope the president says that in these very difficult times, when the middle class is struggling, that, yes, we are going to move toward deficit reduction but in a way that is fair. i would be delighted to be supportive of it. i hope he does it. host: we are talking about the current budget which will expire end of september.r the $3.50 trillion spending plan, 1.5 is borrowed money, and to to $50 billion is used to pay off interest on those payments. guest: does this country face a significant national debt problem? $14 trillion and it is a problem which is $1.60 trillion.

let's back it up. how did we get to where we are? everybody agrees we are in the midst of a recession. how do we revitalize the economy, create jobs, put millions of people back to work so they are paying taxes? second of all, i find it interesting that many of the deficit hawks, many of the guys yelling the loudest about this issue, are precisely the people that helped cause the deficit situation that we are in right now. when we were lending to this war in iraq, did you hear him -- did you hear too many people say we cannot go into this war unless we pay for it? i voted against for going to war in iraq for a number of reasons, one of them being that this war was going to end up costing us some $3 trillion by the time we take care of the last veteran.

i find it enormously hypocritical when you see people who say they are so worried about the deficit. we have to cut hundreds of thousands of kids from programs, cut back on heating programs for low income senior citizens. two months ago, they were fighting vigorously for a huge tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. that is what they have been doing for years. i do not quite understand how folks are really concerned about the deficit but want to do huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. when we bailed out wall street, i voted against it by the way, but i did not hear my colleagues -- we cannot provide $700 billion in support to wall street because that will drive up the deficit. steve, to some degree, there is a lot of hypocrisy about this

and it is not focusing on the serious problem of deficit- reduction. a lot of it is ideological. a lot of what we are seeing right now i will vote against today. cut back on the needs of working people, give tax breaks to the wealthiest people in the country, allow the loopholes. we are losing $100 billion a year because of corporations of the wealthy stashing their money in the cayman islands and in the bermuda. outrageous. they are not going to go after it. a lot of this is not moving towards a balanced budget. a lot of it is ideological. host: one other set of numbers and then we will get to the viewer calls and comments. you have seen the figures.

the minotaur programs accounts to about 57% of the budget -- of the programs account to about 57% of the budget. where else do you cut? guest: for example, health care. everybody agrees the cost of health care is outrageously high. today in america, we have a 50 million people with no health insurance. about 45,000 people who are: to die this year because they do not have access to a doctorate. at the end of all of that, health care costs in america today are almost double that of any major country on earth. why is that? one way you can solve that problem is to do what some governments have announced. that is fine. just throw them off.

if you do not have any health insurance, what do you do? you can die or you go to the emergency room. who is going to pick up that bill? people with insurance are going to pick up that bill. we have 50 million people with no health insurance. i think the bill last year it takes us in some way in the right direction but is nowhere near enough. our outcomes in any case are not as good as some other european countries or even canada. we have private insurance companies boost function in life is not to provide quality health insurance to people. it is to make as much money as they can. i introduce legislation calling for a single payer plan. insurance companies are very much against it. in my state of vermont, we have

a governor and legislature prepared to lead this country forward in a single payer program. we have some studies that tell us that will save hundreds of hundreds of millions of dollars. when you get all the administrative costs associated. the goal of health care is to provide quality health care for all people in a cost-effective way, and not to do what we are doing. the second issue is social security. i am getting very, very tired of seeing my political friends saying social security is going broke. let me be very clear. social security is not going broke. social security is under attack right now from people who have always wanted to destroy social security who basically believe that the government should not

play a role in providing government benefits. the social security today as a $2.60 trillion surplus. social security according to everybody who study it, they can pay out every benefit 02 every eligible american for the next 27 years. the social security has not added one nickel, not one nickel, to our deficit, so when people tell you you have to cut back on benefits of social security, raise the retirement age of social security, or privatize it, let's to our retirement accounts by very -- i very strongly disagree with that and i resent that. social security has accomplished what the founders wanted it to accomplish.

before social security, 50% of the elderly in this country were in poverty. now that number is at 10%. three years ago, millions of americans lost their homes, their savings, and other jobs because of the wall street- engineered crash do you know how many people lost their social security benefits? not one person. that is a pretty good record. i know people who want to destroy social security. host: yesterday, you were part of the proceedings. your former colleague from wyoming, the co-chair of the commission on the debt and deficit had this to say. >> social security is not a retirement. we never intended it as retirement. it was an income supplement after the depression. the average age of life was at

63. that is why the age of retirement was set at 65 it. now the life expectancy is 77. today, there are three people paying in and one taking out a printed in 10 years, there will be fit and paying in and three taking out prett. guest: in 1983, social security was in the midst of a real crisis. it was a real crisis. today, we can pay out every benefit for the next 27 years. a the fact is, in 1983, an arrangement was reached between reagan and the democrats. that worked pretty well. and where we are right now, a

2.6 trillion dollars surplus. we can pay out every benefit owed it to every eligible american for the next 27 years. these guys who sit around with their number pads want to figure it out. senator simpson neglected to talk about that. that is to do what barack obama proposed when he was running. that is, right now, if you make $106,000, you contribute to the cap on the amount of taxes that you put into the social security trust fund. what candidate barack obama proposed is you have a bubble that you leave untouched,

$250,000, but then after $250,000, you lift the debt cap and all of that new income is taxed at the same rate. if you do that, social security will be strong for the next 55 years to 60 years. host: the book is called "the speech." you went to the senate floor and you started to deliver a speech. it became somewhat of an internet sensation. a lot of viewers and twitter followers. what happened? guest: many of the issues i have been talking about were taking place. there was the need for an agreement on taxes. the president sat down and negotiated an agreement with republicans, which i thought was a very, very unfair

agreement. what the president essentially allowed in that so-called compromise was the extension of the bush tax breaks for the wealthy. again, i find it incomprehensible that people can talk about deficit reduction when you give hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to the very wealthy. host: he pointed out that president bush inherited a surplus in 2001 and a projected 10-year surplus of $5.60 trillion guest: that is right. after the clinton administration, we were going forward. you remember there were great debates. what we going to do with all the surplus? should we give tax breaks to everybody right now? to be use it for infrastructure? there was a great debate of what

we could uses this money on. one of the reasons that we were in the deficit situation is these huge tax breaks the go to the wealthiest people. many of the viewers heard warren buffett is one of the richest guys in the world. he points out that the affected tax rate right now is about 16%. that is the lowest effective tax rate for the rich that we have seen for decades. warren buffett makes the point that the affected tax rate is than for teachers and others. exxon mobil made billions of dollars in profit. not only did they not pay anything in texas, they got $156 million refund from the irs.

you have large and profitable corporations after large and profitable corporations paying nothing in taxes. if we are serious about bringing an element of fairness into our society and seeing the middle class get a fair shake, we need to ask the wealthiest people in this country and a large corporations to start paying their fair share of taxes. host: we are talking to bernie sanders who servesrs on the budget committee. dennis is joining us from kansas city, missouri. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you lou. do you know the percentage of children that contribute to political campaigns? guest: dennis, i think you hit

the nail on the head. and the working family in america will tell you how difficult it is to get quality affordable child care. years ago as a nation when we said we had the highest rate of childhood poverty, and we understand that if kids do not get the intellectual and emotional nourishment that they need, by the time they get to kindergarten or the first grade a, they are already behind. we are looking at kids getting into drugs. we have more people in jail than any other country. what we decided to do was let's help them or give them quality early childhood education. the caller was saying that our republican friends went to throw up to 200,000 kids off of the head start program.

how much of their parents contribute to the political process? dennis is right. a lot of what takes place right now is only made worse by the citizens united decision which will allow corporations and planners to make as much money as they want in the political process with no disclosure. not only on the republican party, but on the democratic party as well. host: your 400 wealthiest families -- . .

right now with our middle class virtually disappearing and poverty increasing, the idea that 400 families own more wealth than the bottom 50% of america is obscene. it's really indefenseible. and in terms of job creation, we know most of the large companies are employing fewer americans than they used to because they have outsourced our jobs to countries like china. >> host: good morning. caller: good morning, sir. and i missed -- you ended your last segment before i could be

on the air. but first i have a critique for c-span and then a comment. host: certainly. caller: i was an avid watcher of c-span but stopped watching after the last election. because you're the only outlet in america where every listener gets to hear each other. what i'm offended by with c-span, and you have a responsibility. one of the reasons is why i'm an independent is because i'm only interested in the truth. i'm not interested in a label or anything. but you-all let republicans sit there and say obama care. that guy you had on before this senator was a complete disaster. you-all know the facts. you're intelligent people. when these people are telling

absolute lies -- host: so what questions should we have asked? caller: when you know they are saying things that are fact ually wrong, you need to -- i want to say something to mr. sanders. mr. sanders, i have watched you. i -- america needs more individuals like you in our positions of leadership. i love your truth and fearlessness and i've watched you in different media, and every single time, you're very consistent. i have much respect for you, and and you are the exact opposite of the gentleman who was on before you and the people want those who have passion and fair to in their bellies. i love you and i'm sure i'm just one voice speaking for

many. guest: that's very kind of you. let me just say this. one of the things -- you ask why the speech i gave went well over the internet and was picked up so much on facebook around all of that. and i think the answer is there are a lot of things going on in our country that are not talked about in our corporate media and right-wing media. whatever you are, they know something is wrong, and they know that the middle class for whatever reason is collapsing. people are working longer hours for low wages. they are worried about themselves and their kids, and if we don't turn things around, our kids are going to have a lower standard of living than we are. host: you said what motivates these people is greed, greed, and more greed.

so lobbyists are all over capitol hill. these are sometimes former leaders of the democratic party, republican party. their job is to make sure legislation repasses like this tax bill where only the wealthy benefit. guest: that's right. and the fact is -- that's the point. how much does somebody really need? i have no objection. there's always going to be people who are rich and people who are poor. but you really need to hire lobbyists and spend so much to make a couple million more? in the history there's always been the vision between the people who own the company and the people who work. but many of the major corporations who are running profitable businesses say i'm not making enough profit so i'm

going to lay off thousands of workers and go make more money. so the point i make is you're looking at folks on the top -- incredible greed. it appears no matter how much they have, they need more. they get huge numbers of tax breaks. in terms of wall street, for example. and let me be clear. we are in the midst of an horrendous recession. unemployment is not 8.9%. real unemployment is closer to 16%. when you add to those numbers people who have given up looking for work and those who are working 20 hours a week when they want to work 40 hours a week.

every week we hold a town meeting. people say how come none of these guys at wall street who perform illegal acts -- none of them have gone to jail? host: yes. when are we going to have justice for those wall street crooks as they ask? guest: because the wall street crooks are too powerful. and they aren't going to get justice, because they pretty much tone republican party and have a lot of power in the democratic power. what should have happened is a month later we should have had a commission -- in 1932-1933 a guy worked in the senate investigating what went on in wall street and the damage these people did to our economy , how many people lost their home, their life savings, but they are too powerful,

apparently, to be taken to justice. and that's a sad state of affairs. guest: from virginia, good morning. caller: you know as long as you sit there and filibuster, you'll never have to answer too many questions from conservatives, because you sit there and talk for 20 minutes and nobody gets in. but i want to tell you a little story. i was raised during the lyndon johnson great society program. what happened, we soon learned the government would send us a check. the more kids we had the more money we would get. they had it to where we could leighton couch all day and live the good life. you see, i was fortunate. i joined the marine corps and got out in the world and seen the harder you work, the better

off you are. and you know, you're a good man. you're a compassionate man. but socialism will not work in this country, and you know it. if you take away incentive for people to work, people won't work. and that's just the way it is. look, stop filibustering so much, and let other people ask you questions about consecutivism. thank you. guest: let me answer the caller. i didn't know that i was filibustering, but the idea that the american people kind of don't want to work. i've heard that before. i'm not going to tell you there aren't people out there who will not exploit the system, who will get food stamps or something in order not to work. bureau i think the number of those people are overstated. the truth of the matter is we live in a country.

for whatever anyone around the world may say about america. we are the hardest working people in the world. we had the dubious distinction of surpassing the japanese in the number of hours our people work. i can tell you that in my state of vermont, it's not uncommon for people to work two, three, occasionally four jobs in order to put together an income. and there's nothing i've said that suggests that people shouldn't be working or working hard. one of the things i talked about in my speech is right now with unemployment as high as it is, there's an enormous amount of work to be done. not sure about west virginia but we need work on our infrastructures, our roads, bridges, public transportations.

we can put over a period of time, billions of people to work rebuilding our infrastructure, which makes us more competitive. so please don't hear me suggest that we don't want to encourage people to work, and i think in this country i do think people want people work. host: the speech -- it's now turned into a book. it's called "the speech," bernie sanders on corporate greed and the decline of our middle class. one of our viewers who tweets this, please comment on the fight and people like the industries.

guest: i mentioned earlier in my speech, in my vureks no matter what your political persuasion, we agree the gap between the rich and everybody else is growing wider. and there are a number of reasons for that. one of which is a disasterous trade policy. i think that's nafta's tradal relations which have basically allowed corporate america to throw american workers out on the street, move to developing countries where people are sometimes paid pennies an hour and they bring the products back to america. we have lost millions of good-paying jobs. another part of the reason the middle class is in decline is not unrelated to the trade issue is fewer and fewer people are members of trade unions. what a trade union is simply about is bringing people together so they can collectively, standing together,ing negotiate with

their employer a fair contract. what is going on in wisconsin today is part of the assault on the middle class. and what we're seeing now is a governor. every state in the country virtually has serious deficit problems, and each state is trying to deal with that. 6 but ending unions and ending the ability of people to bargain is an effort to destroy your political opposition. make it harder for working people to stand together to get a fair shake. i think what's going on in wisconsin is not unrelated to what's going on here in washington. there are savage attacks taking place against the middle class. when you give tax breaks to billionaires and deny people access to health care or go back on pale grants at a time when families are desperately

trying to get their kids into college is an assault. what about the other things? this is where the greed element comes in. the koch brothers, which is not unique, are now in a position through the disasterous supreme court citizens united system allowed to put as much money as they want in tv ads or anything without any disclosure, because the supreme court said they now have unlimited first amendment rights to get involved in the political system. many wealthy people. not all. you have a lot of wealthy people who say i'm worried about my country and the children in my country, don't give me tax breaks but a lot of folks say i'm worth $35 billion. i need more, more, more. let's work together to break unions and so forth. so what you're looking at is

the wealth get bigger and you see their political power growing as well. host: good morning, you're on the democrat's line. caller: i do like the format c-span runs. i like that guest speakers can have their say, and there's no opinion from the facilitator. i want to talk to mr. sanders regarding what's going on in wisconsin here. i've listened to a lot of what you have to say. i am a democrat. but i feel like i'm ante democrat. and i'm a former teacher. former principal. just watching what's going on in this state in terms of the governor attempting to break the unions. and i think as an extension to that, interrupt the flow of

support -- financial support for politicians that represent i think the middle class. i want to thank this gentleman for standing up and speaking the truth. that's why i listen to c-span. and i want you to just continue. and i hope people of the middle class will start to do more of what has happened here in wisconsin. voters or citizens standing up and really being citizens, and showing the world what democracy looks like in action. host: thank you. guest: i agree. what you're seeing in wisconsin goes beyond what's going on in their own state. i think people are sick and tired of the assaults being held against the middle class. and those saying look at

private employees. they don't have this or that. we want the middle class to expand. we don't want to keep attacking each other in a race to the bottom. so they argue that you have in wisconsin now, teachers and public compleeze and fair tomen and police officers standing together to say hey, we've got to protect the middle class against continued assault, i think is good. host: where would you put your political ideology? guest: well, i am -- on if ballot, i've always run since i was elected mayor of burlington as independent. i'm proud the people have given me the opportunity to serve as mayor in the house and now in the senate. i am the longest-serving independent in the history of the united states of america. i am an independent, because i

think -- as some of the callers have suggested today. money plays a huge role in our political process influencing both political parties. i came from a family who never had a whole lot of money. i think the job of us is not to worry assistant needs of the wealthy, but ordinary people today who are really, really hurting. i am a progressive in terms of what goes on in scanned 2345eu6ya and as i've indicated the growing inquality -- inequality that's going on in the country is not good. host: has president obama met your expectations two years into his term guest: in general, no. in some ways, yes. i think at the present we have a guy who is incredibly smart.

incredibly articulate. i think he has done some very, very good things. i think the plate he inherited when he came in was just unbelievable in terms of the financial crisis, losing 700 jobs a month. very, very difficult stuff. i was a strong believer in the stimulus package. i would have liked to have seen that package be greater. he and i worked together in one area. we're not going to get a handle on health care until we make sure everyone in this country has access to a doctor and don't end up sick. we are going to double the number of community health centers in america and provide health care to 40 million people in that area. he's been strong in trying to

move us away from fossil fuel and there are areas where i have not agreed with him. the agreement he struck with the republicans in terms of taxes was a bad agreement. i have been very concerned that a lot of people in the financial area that he has brought into the white house have come from wall street and have not been there to trent middle class and working families. i certainly disagree with some of his budget the suggests. 4 low-income, heat-cooling assistance program. i got a lot of senior citizens trying to stay alive on $13,000-$14,000 a year. that's not helping them. it's a mixture. host: we are with senator bernie sanders, independent from vermont. he's out with a new book called "the speech," a script of the

speech he made. from scotland, hello, matthew. caller: hello. i wanted to ask the senator what he thinks about us not putting more money in for education? guest: i think it's insa i thin when i hear my colleagues cut back on pell grants, when i read that there are states like texas and other states prepared to lay off around our country, hundreds of thousands of teachers. clearly everybody understands if you're going to make it in the middle class, you need a good education, likely a college degree. clearly everybody understands we're losing a whole lot of kids who are dropping out.

and question need to increase our educational abilities, not diminish them. one of the areas that doesn't get a lot of press or attention, but we have a real crisis in child care in this country. and if you're a two-income family and most families have husband and wife working, how do you provide good, quality child care for your kid at a decent cost? it doesn't exist in most places. we've got to work on that legislation to address that. so i don't think you cut back on teachers and education. i think you also have to reform education as well. there's no question about that. but to say we should throw teachers -- fair to large numbers of teachers, make our classroom sizes even larger, or throw hunry,eds of thousands of

kids off of head start is not good. i think if you want to attract the best and the brightest young people, you're going to have to pay them a good salary. and we also have to a midress t fact that clidge is so high right now, that a lot of people have given up on the desire to go to college. not to mention others graduating deeply in debt. host: one asks would you ask your guest what he thinks about the fair tax bill? guest: as i understand it. the millionaires and people making $25,000 should be the same would be a real boone dogal. clearly the tax code rlidht now is out of control. enormous numbers of loop holes, most of which benefit the large

companies. exxonmobile, one of many who pay nothing in federal income taxes. so we need a simplefied tax code. host: and george has this. that caller from west virginia, socialism worked pretty well for bankers on wall street. guest: another point i make is in many ways, we have a system. but over america, you have small business workers, and they are desperately in need of affordable loans. tht cannot get it. yet if you're the largest financial institution in the world being involved in illegal activity, you get a massive bailout. one thing is to you had a it the fed in terms of their emergency provisions that took

place during and after the crash. the fed made that available a wirowmonths ago. people say the $700 billion we used to bail out wall street is only a small part of what took place. what also took place wasmak3 trillion in very low interest loans that went to every large financial institution and went to companies like general motors and foreign central banks all over the world. so what you had is a perfect example for socialism and wall street and the very rerih for rugged free interprice. host: good morning. welcome to the conversation, david from baltimore. caller: good morning. senator sanders, i remember watching a video of you on houtube wm rnno uestioning ben beon anke and you were astound when you asked bernie -- ben

beon anke if he could tell you where all the money weant he said no. getting to some of your comments earlier. you have continued to speak about the greed of wall street and big business and corporations. howeveger the greed i see that' actually destroying the country is it -- is the greed in wawe sington. perhaps yourself or certainly your colleagues there in the senate or the house. you guys continue to spend a lot more money. way too much more, more than what the federal government legitimately brings in every month. and you always want to raise taxes on the wealthy or whatever to cover the expenses of your increased spending in washington. why didesnt federal government simply live within its mean and

si simly spend what you take in every month which i've heard is around $200 billion per month. guest: what a. hou talked about the fed. yes, i did ask enter nangey where the trillions of the dollars went. he refused to tell me. ndee introduced legisla make him tell me, that information was included in the financial reforr sbibt eventually $3 trillion going to every financampl institution in this can you think. many large corporations. ernany inmanyvidual in terms of spending within our means. yes. i agree with you. i ran a city for eight years. we sfent same amount as we towh in. we had a balanced budget. should we be doing that? hes. but when you're in the midst of a recession and you have a ndehole loft people tha hurting, you have investments that you have to make. it's wrong in my view that we

should be throwing hundreds of thousands of kids off of head starbt one of many. to answer your question, a b. wget is two things. spenmanyng and bringing in revenue. i do believe it's absurd to give tax breaks on those who do not need it and then take away programs that are essential. host: we've covered "the speech" on c-span two. thank you for b in thng with ma. appreciate your time. coming up, we're going to introduce you to our grand prize winner on our c-span student cam contest. first a look at the latest news from c-span radio. >> this jmalt ing. the btrird o incrp.ur nodus fired c.e.o. vi shiller in the wake of a video

sting by a conservatrone activist. and joe biden speaking to business leaders in rmalsia at management school calling on russia to attack -- and president obama and first lady my chevy are in washington and posting a face pook video to prevent bullying. in a taped video message the president says bullying should no longer be treated as an unavoidable part of growing up. those are the headlines on c-span radio.

>> the declaration of independence, the bill of rights and constitution. >> may 29, 1787, on this day ndeilliam randolph intr virginia plan for the constitution. the late senator r rmert bied t spoke about the virginia plan and the events that followed its introduction. >> under the virginia plan, both houses of congress will be apportioned by a population, in favor of the larger states. axe the smaller states wilt threatened by the plan. >> however, the delegates rejected the smaller plaincr 2 convention split 5-5. >> the convention was in a deapnocso >> they appointed a special committee to solve the disuctte

axe it deterthin ned hage the legislative branches are operated today. axe it gave the states equality in the senate. >> this would come to be known as the great compromise. >> an excerpt from the grand pri wh winnegerve barl, an elid grader from cary, north carolina, and the entry was titled the great compromise. joanne wheeler made the call last friday. here's an excerpt of hage that conversation went. >> karl, we have judged over 1,000 videos in the midpne and high school categories and our theme, you did a video called it ahe great compromise" and ou judges have deemed it our grand prize winner. congratulations. >> thank you. >> when did you start working on your video? >> back in august, actually.

>> that's great. hage long manyd it take you? >> all the way until the deadline. axe my goodness. axe your video will be availabl for everyone to see as of march 9, at student cam radst.. thank you so much. >> thank you. axe you're welcome. bye. >> whoo! karl! oh, ng, god! axe and you got called. >> and they finally called me. when he wil>> thi ive bnew they gvideong to call today, because checked and one of their people said they are calling all the winners today. i was like like oh, grand pres ae! i did not expve ct that. host: the scene here last

friday as he rve c in thved the fromspantriand oe wheeler here c-span that he was the grand pri wh winneur one of 75 winners from c-span's student cam contest. part of cgrapan's education tea joins us live here at c-span. first of all, what was the theme and hage many entries overall did we receive? >> good firon inama this was wawe sintiton, de c. through my lens. we asked students to e clain hage an issoug, toperi or event helped them better understand the role of the federal goveon ment in their life ordinary person community. ndee rve c in thved are. of entries. 1,069 from 40 states and ndeashingtong. d.c. ndee awaed tedthe s5 st and 11 teacher prizes totaling $50iday00. he, the grand pri wh winner wil be receiving $5,000.

host: who were the fist pres ae wiand oers? >> in high school it was have -- the d howumentary titled "after the storm." his documentary matthew took us back to an event in 2008 in ndehich a pageerful tor through his town, essentially leaving a wake of destm ctioincr and it's through matthew's interviews elected offeriampls and fema and in speaking with members of his community that ernatthodu gssonedt the process to acquire federal funds to assist in rebuilding th in thr toanch. he rve corded c-span footage in his video. it's throucat the way matthodu nde came all of this in

together that he shared the compelling story of hage the people of parkersburg came together to rebrvld their communitl host: as you indicated. over 1,000 entries. where can people view the winners? >> one more is our first prize ernidpne ir hool wi it's a team of young lady it's from knoxville, tennessee. katy bve cker, melissa yoo and kara atkins ro students at the middle ir hool. they chose an issue to sho00. they -- the girls explained how first oft ps access the interne on a dssoly basis. but we don't give much thought as to hage we are rve c in thvi content. they asked is this an issue the

wideral goveon ment should be involved in or should it be left in the private sve ctor? is and they interviodued people in their community and created a map demonstrating the pathwalef the g camernment can take to effect change in the isfirse. either tcommuoucat legislation other means and so the girls did an excellentspan rm of explssoskeng a complicated topi so you can go directly to our st. went cam wc13 site, studentcam.org where we've posted all 75 winskeng do rementaries. and the second way is right here on c-span. begiand oing aprilin h9 1 to ap 27 at 6:50 a.m. eastern time, we will be showing one winskeng

e. howumentary out of t and at 8:30 eastern time we will be ssoring interviodus wit the creators of those. so those are the ways in which you can vie00. >> search, watch, clip and

share. it's washington, your way. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our focus, guantanamo bay. thank you for being with us. guest: thank you for having me. host: the president's announcement, what changes and what doesn't in regards to those detainees at gtmo? guest: well, the trials sb have sort of been on hold since he took office. so we've had a admitted masterminds and conspirators behind 9/11. so there had been a hold put on that. and now officially that process can restart. they also issued an executive order that basically put those rules in place for holding people indefinitely. to be blunt about it, there are

people we are not going to be able to prosecute at guantanamo bay. and there are people we can't release even though we said we want to release them. they are eligible to be released. we can't figure out what to do with them and so president obama issued an executive order and said this is what the rules are going to be. host: this is first from the "washington post" this morning, a small step at gone gone. -- at guantanamo bay. the president's speech is both an admission of failure and a step in the right direction. another comment. unswift and uncertain. with the 10th anniversary of 9/11 the chances of one of those detainees, cleedcleed facing swift justice and sure

justice are more of a concern. >> guest: well, anyone thinking we were going to close guantanamo bay, it's just not going to happen. it's open for the foreseeable future. that's just a reflection of the current political situation. the president ran into some political hurdles and national security hurdles. those put up roadblocks to him shutting down guantanamo bay. at this point an acknowledge ment from the administration that it has to deal with those from guantanamo bay because closing it in the sort-term is just not part of the

discussion. host: 779 detained. 600 have been transfered. 172 remain in the facility and seven have passed away while in custody. >>al correct. guest: you look at the 172, and you can basically divide them into three groups. about half of those 172 have been cleared for release. they have vade we're cleared to release these guys. these guys we shouldn't beholding. then about a quarter of them are ultimately going to be prosecuted. another quarter will probably never be prosecuted, but we know they are too dangerous to release, but we don't have the evidence to prosecute them or prosecuting them would reveal a lot of methods on the intelligence side.

when you think of half of the people at guantanamo bay have been cleared for release, and now we're talking about holding them indefinitely lyrics this is not where the obama administration thought they were going to be in 2009. there's a caricature that says gtmo, yes, we're open. another was a campaign pledge to close it. the president saying the goal is still to close guantanamo bay. but is that realistic based on monday's decision? >> it wasn't realistic before monday, but it's not realistic now. it's a weird dichotomy that this administration finds itself in.

they've said repeatedly guantanamo bay is bad for america and fuels or gives fuel to the terrorist fight. it's become a symbol and rallying point. yet because of where we're add at, they've also codfied it and basically said -- at least for the foreseeable future, it will remain open. host: and even maximum security prisons in the u.s. congress is saying no? guest: congress is saying no. no money, at least for prisoners for transfer this week, even to stand trial and

frankly is what really gets us. they should just say we're going to proceed with guantanamo bay. host: have you been there? guest: i have not. my colleagues have. i've read their accounts. host: based on what you've been hearing and reporting on, what are their conditions like? guest: there's reports that the conditions there are relatively good and that people are being treated fairly. think there's probably lawyers for individual depe containees that would argue with that. but that's probably an oorget made by every prisoner in america. but you read about what the f.b.i. documented.

generals have written about mistreatment at -- early on in the prison. in the guantanamo bay my colleagues told me about today. i think the question for the many administration and the one they are wrestling with is not are we treating these people well? and i think certainly administration is planning to treat these guys well, certainly, indefinitely. i mean, you're talking about 86 or 84 people who have been cleared for release who we are making arrange neents -- arrangements to hold permanently. host: so for cleed shake mohammed? guest: k.s.m., by all cases,

k.s.m. is going to get lumped back in with his co-conspirators. the 9/11 guys all want to go to trial and they all want to plead guilty. they all signed letters saying hey, we did it. so this would give them a process of sorts to plead guilty or go to trial. depending on how quickly the administration moves, it will resolve the question of are we going to get to the 10-year history without anybody being held accountable for it? where we stand today, hundreds of people died. and it was the worst in a moment u.s. history. and nobody's been held accountable for that. if we get to the 10-year

history i think we'll get to that announcement. host: we're talking with matt apuzzo of the associated press. caller: you talk about the 84 prisoners scheduled for release. i think it's because a lot of countries in the world where they claim they come from can't establish that they came from there and two, they don't want them back and another have been a lot of the countries said if you return them, we will execute them. guest: as for your first point, about 50-some-odd detainees of the 80 that have been cleared for release are from yemen and they are definitely from yemen. that's not in dispute.

but the concern is yemen is not stable right now, and yemen is home to al qaeda and the arabian pap nins lei which is probably the biggest threat against the united states right now. they were the group behind the christmas bombing attempt over detroit. and once that happened, president obama put a hold on all of them. there's talk of a rehab facility in yemen. but yemen is essentially a third-world country. not a lot of money. i don't know that the u.s. is going to fund their rehab facility. so you have a situation from the majority of the people released would go back to yemen. but we're not going to allow that to happen. at least not in the short term. so one of the real -- there's

some disengeneralousness in what was said in monday's announcement where they are going to have their cases reviewed. but if someone looks at your case and says you shouldn't be held here, they can say you should be released. but there's no actual teeth on that. there's no requirement that they actually release them. if you use the civilian model it would be like your parole officer says we grant you parole but then they just bring you back to your cell. so you're having people who -- this is the real nut of the issue. half the people who are cleared for release are going to be held indefinitely. that's the real controversial nature of this.

especially among people who spoke to the president early on. host: from wichita, kansas, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. and i'd like to know. these guys are want to plead guilty, why don't we just run from the process, let them -- and carry on from there? guest: well, i think you will see that happen in fairly short order if they decide ultimately -- one of the reasons that hasn't happened is when they started the military tribunal process in the bush administration was a supreme court ruling that was flawed.

so they came in and said you can't do it that way. you've got to do it this way. so even those who are not denying their roles in 9/11. even those or those who haven't had their day in court -- the rules of court have been constantly changing. frankly the rules were written so quickly. in a civilian court, words you can't be say -- words you say can't be used against you. you don't have a jury of your peers. you've a jury of military officers, which is very similar -- obviously that's how they do it in court-martials. but the rules of evidence are different. there's self-incrim nation shufments things that can't be

used against you in criminal court that can be used against you in court. the situation exists for a lot of these guys where you don't know exactly who is accusing you or who is providing the evidence against you or what treatment did they get to convince them to give information up about you? >> so it's definitely -- the administration is using a more robust system than was used years ago, but certainly it does not rise to the level of the process you should get. host: we're talking to mta. the -- we're talking to mta. -- matt apuzzo and richard is joining us from lynn,

massachusetts on the democrat's line. good morning. caller: good morning. in guantanamo bay there's only 166 prisoners there? i wish somebody gave me a speedy trial when i was going to court. these guys are alled a -- they killed thousands of people. guest: i don't think you'd get a lot of argument from the white house guys. the real hiccup is what do you do with the people who are cleared for release, who have

been through a review and yet we're going to hold them indefinitely? i think that's the real issue in a lot of this. i don't think that president obama, when he announced that they were going to close guantanamo bay, i don't think there's any way he thought we would be sitting here today talking about this executive order. everybody knew this type of executive order would be issued that the president would cod phi some sort of indefinite attention. but when we were talking about that, people envisioned we would close guantanamo bay. we would move these guys on u.s. soil and there would be a handful we would need to hold indefinitely. civilian courts, guantanamo bay would be closed, and we could make this more palletible for

americans and certainly for a lot of human rights and liberties folks that hoped barack obama would close it. caller: i'm a big fan of c-span. i listen all the time. i'm a big alex jones listener. he talks about all this stuff about extra rendition and torture and continuing all these wars. when they say they are going to stop them, continue it until 2014 now, and it's just a matter of time now before everyone realizes we've been lied to, here, in a big way, and water boarding people for how long -- they'll admit to anything if they are being tortured. and i personally think in my opinion that 9/11 was staged. host: well, i think as far ads

the watt irboarding and torture goes -- guest: the rules that govern the military trials now are pretty clear that torture and mistreatment, that any statement that came from that isn't going to get introduced sboof evidence. there is that protection that does exist in the middle tamplete host: and we've had this argument for the past 0 years that 9/11 was a staged event. guest: i got nothing on that one. host: jason from kentucky. good morning. caller: i have a question. i was wondering how americans would feel if our people were treated like we treat the afghans or the iraqis. and if you could comment on that. host: that was one of the issues -- guest: it's actually a really

interesting issue, and one that the president has had to deal with which is this issue that are we behaving the way we want other countries to behave with our prisoners? i think it's a little bit different in that typically when your -- when our soldiers fight, we fight fair as they say. we have uniforms and try to minimize civilian casualties, and these guys don't fight fire. but the other idea that this idea of fairness is really one that's become a thorn in the side of the u.s. and because we won't take any guantanamo bay detainees. even those who say we probably shouldn't have picked them up in the first place. but the we are asking other countries to take them. so from a diplomatic point, so

-- we are offering money or political favors to try to roll this. so other countries are saying if you won't take them, why should we take them? so there is that question of fairness that i think whether you're democrat or republican, ideally, you don't want u.s. foreign policy to -- you want them to be negotiating from a point of strength. and this hases not been that. host: matt apuzzo who is covering the guantanamo bay story for the associated press. your may see his by line. charlotte, good morning. caller: yes. i believe earlier you said the prisoner -- there's a pass the

fa sillty that requires additional funding and two, mr. apuzzo shows a little bit of his bias when he talks about the day that we had the 9/11 that hundreds of people lost their lives. thousands of people lost their lives and two, when someone makes a comment about it being staged and you give a laugh and a smile and a which he shall ire grin, that belays the fact of where your opinion is. guest: i have no information on 9/11 being an inside job. my chuckle was i came on to talk about guantanamo bay, and i have no expertise on the 9/11 -- i wasn't covering it. i wasn't in washington or new york and didn't cover it and that's not been my beat.